What do we agree on: Advocacy TF recommendations

Exactly.

There are a number of different parties in the wiki movement and they have different roles.

The national chapters are organised within particular legal jurisdictions and so it makes sense they should take the lead in advocacy. The lack of a USA chapter could lead to some confusion here but I really would not like to see the Foundation acting as a surrogate US chapter. On the other hand I don't want a US chapter acting as a surrogate Wikimedia board either.

Beside the chapters are the projects, organised by language and by topic (Encyclopedia, dictionary, Source document archive etc.) The projects editors are more inward looking, concentrating on improving that project.

The Foundation has two sides The Trustees represent the editors in the chapters and projects. The need to be the public face of Wikipedia to the world but they also act as the users interface to the staff deciding the long term direction and core objectives towards which we are working.

The staff role is more technical, keeping the wheels oiled and the train rolling.

For core beliefs I think a good start is to look at where we are and what we are doing. See my comment on Milosh's post just below.

Filceolaire13:51, 5 March 2010